Modern (post-1950) circulated coins- anyone collect them?

lclugza

Does anyone here collect modern (post-1950) circulating coins in sets in circulated condition? I'm talking about Lincolns with the Memorial reverse, Jeffs, Roosies, Washingtons, Franklins, later Wheaties, etc. And if you do collect them, do you collect them in MS/Proof as well, and I would appreciate a story about your modern circulated coins.

mbbiker

I collect circs but not proofs. I have a whitman book for each denom and i'm trying to fill them all from pocket change. It's cheap, keeps collecting fun, and i almost get the same satisfaction from filling a hole in the whitman as i do when i add a high dollar coin to my type set.

Coulport

At this point I think you could classify it as an accumulation.

nwcs

Yes, but not in great quantities. I have a set of jeffs solid from 1959 to 1995 from circulation and several before. Trying to complete that all from circulation. I have a collection of lincolns from 1940-1995 straight almost all from circulation. I haven't done that with dimes or quarters yet, but may eventually. I like the fact that they are inexpensive. I've also been moving to snap up higher end raw uncirculated moderns when I find them. Found a great 1968 dime in MS65 that is raw. I have some proofs, but mainly doing the mint set and proof thing during the state quarter program.

cladking

I collect 1965 to date dimes and quarters from circulation. I started these sets
in 1997 shortly after Congress OK'ed the 50 states quarters program. I have sev-
eral rolls of circ quarters pulled from circulation before this time but they are not in-
cluded in this set. I also collect gems of all 1965 to date coins and specialize in
quarters. My circ set is up to 88 different pieces (plus 20 states issues) pulled out
of about 14,000 randomly acquired coins. I still lack four of the major varieties. Most
of the early dates are XF and middle dates are XF/AU. '95 and later are all choice unc.
The '68, '69, '70-D, '71 are VF or lower. I don't add a new coin unless it's clearly bet-
ter than the one already in the set, with a strong preference for well struck coins.
I lack the 77-D, '78, and 79-D type "d" reverse coins and the '74-D reverse of '72.
There are several of the minor varieties which haven't shown up yet too. Of course
the set also lacks the '71 and '72 DDO's.

The gem set is pretty nice but has only one of the varieties- - 81-P type "d". I do
have almost all the varieties in unc though.

oldshep

I'm glad you brought this up - I have started collecting modern proof and mint sets - also the Silver Eagle proofs. This supplies me with beautiful mint state coins - raw of course, but beautiful. Isn't that what this is all about - the enjoyment of coins. I know this is not a good investment scheme but I have coins that are very satisfying to look at, for prices that don't break the bank. I also love the history involved in collecting raw circulated coins from the 1900's to date. If these coins could talk...

Shep

lordmarcovan

I collect post-1950 circulated coins, not from the United States, but from Ireland (all Irish Free State predecimal coins from 1928 to 1969, after which they switched to decimal coinage). While these are modern coins, many have surprisingly low mintages, and they've been technically "obsolete" for 30-odd years. (Now doubly obsolete, since the adoption of the Euro).

GaCoinGuy

I focus mainly on modern proofs for my registry sets.........type and 1969 proof set..........I do have a Dansco I am trying to fill with a US Type Set. Funny, though, my Darkside focus is Predecimal GB large Pennies......right now its focused on pre 20th century.



For the modern proofs, I like to bust em out of proof sets and submit when I can, however, lately, I haven't been able to do that and have had to buy the coins to fill the holes in my set........least that way, I have some upgrades to shoot for in my own submissions.

dbldie55

I collect all of the current series out of "change" except the ones you cannot ge (the halves and dollars). They can all be found. I can do a set in a week or so for most series.

TheCoinGod

I collect any BU Lincoln Memorials by the roll, and i put together all the modern sets as a kid juts through the bank. I was never able to finish off the kennedys though, I still go to the bank and get 400 dollars in halves, and go through them looking for 86-P, 87-P,D, and 89-P but to no avail, i am still searching.

Striker

I collected them to the point that the particular set was completed but thats it.

Baley

my rule of thumb is: the newer the coin, the better condition it has to be in for me to consider it collectible. the exception is for scarcer dates and varieties, and there is some date overlap, but generally, post 1950 coins should be gem bu or gem proof, and post-1982 coins should be at least MS66 or PF68. 1900-1950 coins are nice in choice to gem BU and proof, with the older coins collectible down to AU or so. 1850 to 1900 coins are great down to Fine or Very Fine, 1815-1850 anything VG or better is certainly worth saving, and pre-1815, I'll consider anything in problem-free AG and up.

just my opinions. some people put collections together out of pocket change, others only want gems no matter how old the coin (and therefore cant afford anything more than about 50 years old) but I think most collectors fall somewhere in between, and look for the value grade, and for newer coins, I just don't think circulated common stuff will ever (at least in our lifetimes) be worth much more than face or melt. Doesn't stop it from being fun filling holes out of circulation, just limits the potential profit.

cjmbuffalo

I collect all denominations both in MS and Proof state. My min standards for the MS collection is MS 65 and the proofs are the same. Everything stays in a raw state because I don't feel the need to have them slabbed. My dates start at 1950 and go forward. When completed I will go to older dates and attempt to collect the entire set of pennies, dimes, nickles, quarters, Halves and dollars. Its a fun challenge. My only slabbed coins are my Ikes in MS and Proof.

jonesy

I collect them if the price is right. Someday someone is going to get a whole lot of subpar coins.
Glenn

meos1

Yes... I am actively building the monster set of two hundred years ago. I don't have to shell out ridoiculous money and I have the same feeling of satisfaction. No reason to be out buy ridiculously expensive coins. If someone would like to offer me a job with a hugh salary I would be willing to consider buy some ridiculously high priced specimens!

Best regards,

Dan

beartracks42

I have all the Lincolns in circ. condition from 1909 thru 2002, excepting the varieties such as D/D and the 22 Plain. I also have all of the Jefferson nickels and the Washingtons in complete circ. sets from start date to present. I do not collect dimes or MS halves. I have a short set of Walkers in AU-MS64.
I enjoy those sets about as much as my BU sets that I am collecting or my morgans.

cladking

<< <i>my rule of thumb is: the newer the coin, the better condition it has to be in for me to consider it collectible. the exception is for scarcer dates and varieties, and there is some date overlap, but generally, post 1950 coins should be gem bu or gem proof, and post-1982 coins should be at least MS66 or PF68. 1900-1950 coins are nice in choice to gem BU and proof, with the older coins collectible down to AU or so. 1850 to 1900 coins are great down to Fine or Very Fine, 1815-1850 anything VG or better is certainly worth saving, and pre-1815, I'll consider anything in problem-free AG and up.

just my opinions. some people put collections together out of pocket change, others only want gems no matter how old the coin (and therefore cant afford anything more than about 50 years old) but I think most collectors fall somewhere in between, and look for the value grade, and for newer coins, I just don't think circulated common stuff will ever (at least in our lifetimes) be worth much more than face or melt. Doesn't stop it from being fun filling holes out of circulation, just limits the potential profit. >>



Baley: Excellent post. I do agree with you. I do not collect the modern circs for profit
potential. When I started the circ set profit was the furthest thing from my mind. Pri-
marily I just wanted a visual representation of what the new collectors were going to
have in their collections. Since I started the set though several things have become clear:
There are lots of tough coins in circulation, there are more people collecting them than I'd
have predicted, and these coins are starting to disappear pretty quickly. Coins like an AU
or even an XF '68 quarter have been impossible to find in circulation for many years now.
But coins don't understand statistics and people do some very unpredictable things. They
do things like save up all their quarters for thirty years so they can buy a truck, or they
stash a "rare" date in the wall of a house they're building. These coins DO come back into
circulation after many years, even the statistically impossible coins. While I haven't found
an XF '68 I did find a nice slider AU+ '69-D which is very nearly as improbable. Several of the
grades I've found are impossibilities. There are also the low mintage varieties like the '77
type "d" reverse. Fewer than 100,000 of these were minted. It was not reported until the
last year. Nearly a third of all the '77 quarters have been destroyed by time. Only one '77
coin in about 500 is a type "d". While this is hardly a rarity in VG it is decidely rare in VF. It
is much harder in XF and in 23 years of searching in a methodical fashion, I have not located
an unc coin. If people get interesting in this large series of type "d's" then the few in circulation
will dry up pretty quickly.

Beyond this there have been several modern rarities turn up in circulation in the last thirty
seven years. There are too many to list them all but they include the '76 NMM (P) proof dol-
lar and a 74-D silver dollar, both 72-D DDO quarters and many others. Future collectors may
well point to this era as one of the best for circulation finds.









typos. (69-"D")

lclugza

I have collections of most all modern types from the 1950s to the mid-1970s in circulated grade- although I'm still missing quite a few of the dates, and some of the coins might grade Uncirculated even though they came from circulation or from bank rolls. And I've never gotten around to putting the dimes and quarters in an album- even though I think I have an album for them somewhere. And I've never gotten albums for the halves and dollars.

jdimmick

I know you modern guys are going to give me what for on this one, but I dont have a single coin later than 1939 in my key-date collection.

braddick

<< <i>Does anyone here collect modern (post-1950) circulating coins in sets in circulated condition? I'm talking about Lincolns with the Memorial reverse, Jeffs, Roosies, Washingtons, Franklins, later Wheaties, etc. And if you do collect them, do you collect them in MS/Proof as well, and I would appreciate a story about your modern circulated coins. >>

Iclugza: Your talking my language.
http://www.pcgs.com/new_set_registry/display_coins.chtml?regsetid=9038&alltime=no

presleyh

Kennedy halves and Ike dollars. I think the Ikes will come into their own in another 30 or 40 years, Just when my first grandchild will enter Georgia Tech.

cladking

<< <i>I know you modern guys are going to give me what for on this one, but I dont have a single coin later than 1939 in my key-date collection. >>



To each his own. Speaking only for myself, it doesn't bother me in the least
when someone doesn't collect moderns. Many people don't collect coins at
all. Many collectors simply have a cut off beyond which he doesn't collect.

I won't collect any coin which I think exists in fed vaults, so coins after 1999
aren't in my collection yet. Many people won't collect things which are older
than a specific date and frequently people never adjust these dates.

Baley

in post-1950 US coins, I like em in Gem Proof and ultra high MS, and/or attractively toned
1900-1950, High Grade MS, attractive toning or nice luster preferred.
1850-1900, Low Grade MS (ok, some high grade )
1838-1850, Au (ok, some EF)
1850-1806, EF (some VF and Fine)
1800-1806, VF (some Fine and VG)
1793-1800, Fine (some G and VG)
pre-1793 (colonials) don't have any, but would take anything recognizeable, if the price was right)
just my preferences, of course people should collect what they like ! also, guidelines are just that, subject to exceptions heh!

JRocco

Yes I have open sets going. Two of my 3 daughters are always searching with me thru pocket change to fill in some of those harder to find dates from circulation. I am watching the spark in their eyes the way it started in mine when I was a kid. I hope they stay with it cause those coins they are pulling today will be tough to find when they are my age now. It also keeps this incredible-family friendly- hobby going.